In a free country, people should have the right to refuse health insurance.

If governments must subsidize those who cannot afford medical care,
they should be free to experiment with different types of subsidies
(cash, vouchers, insurance, public clinics & hospitals,
uncompensated care payments, etc.) and tax exemptions, rather than be
forced by a policy of "universal coverage" to subsidize people via
"insurance."

You know I'm in; after all, I am the one that has said that "universal coverage is as if, in the Great Society public housing programs, everyone in the country, not just the poor, had been required to tear down their current houses and enter monolithic public housing structures."

However, I would have added a fifth principle: Health care decision-making and tradeoffs amongst cost, quality, and
content of care should belong to the individual, except when an
individual delegates this decision in some way by his own choice (say
by joining a very structured HMO program).

In a free country, people should have the right to refuse health insurance.

If governments must subsidize those who cannot afford medical care,
they should be free to experiment with different types of subsidies
(cash, vouchers, insurance, public clinics & hospitals,
uncompensated care payments, etc.) and tax exemptions, rather than be
forced by a policy of "universal coverage" to subsidize people via
"insurance."

You know I'm in; after all, I am the one that has said that "universal coverage is as if, in the Great Society public housing programs, everyone in the country, not just the poor, had been required to tear down their current houses and enter monolithic public housing structures."

However, I would have added a fifth principle: Health care decision-making and tradeoffs amongst cost, quality, and
content of care should belong to the individual, except when an
individual delegates this decision in some way by his own choice (say
by joining a very structured HMO program).